stexpandedfandomcom-20200214-history
Forum:So the problem doesn't repeat...
Now that the "Homesun dilemma" has been handled (thank you, Sasoriza, for all the work in cleaning it up!), I think we should take a very simple step so that such a situation never arises again. In the previous thread, I said: :If he is only writing for himself, then he should not be posting these things here. Period. And I think that's the key thing. Homesun never provided context to his articles so that they could be understood by other people, and he even admitted that he was only writing them for his own "use." I think we should add a brief clause to the Manual of Style or another policy section, stating something to the effect of: ::This wiki is not your personal notepad or storage space. Wiki readers are not mind-readers. Articles must be presented in a clear manner, easily understood by all. If an article on a character is tied into a larger series or "universe," that must be made clear - context must be established. ::*Bad article (no context): "Alf lives on the spaceship. He likes cats." ::In this example, the author's intent is not made clear, and the reader does not know who Alf is or what spaceship he lives on. We do not know if he likes cats as pets or as meals. No one here is a mind-reader. ::*Better article (with context): "Alf is an Melmackian civilian living aboard the USS Gordon Shumway. He is known to sometimes eat cats, though he owns one as a pet himself. ::Here we have context, and a clear picture of who Alf is and where he fits into his "universe." This is just a very basic example. ::Articles that do not provide context will be tagged for copyediting, and the author will be asked to flesh it out and provide the needed context. If the author does not respond to communication within does two months sound?, the article may be removed by administrators. I am not suggesting this to be prejudicial against anyone, I definitely think anyone should be given a chance. If there's a similar problem, every effort should be made to help them improve. But if they are as unresponsive, uncommunicative and unwilling to be part of the community and write their articles to be understood by others, then they should not be here. I think some policy or clause like this will save us all a lot of grief in the future. What do you all think? --TimPendragon 06:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC) I think it sounds okay, and could be attached somewhere, but I don't know if the Style Manual is really the right place for it. However, this line: "This wiki is not your personal notepad or storage space.", is already stated (to that effect, in only slightly different wording) in a couple of places, elsewhere. I think the problem with Homesun is he simply didn't read it or ignored it. (I also think that line sounds just a tad crass -- it should be made "nicer", not referring directly to the reader/potential editor.) But, since you're now bringing this up, I get the impression it must be hard for you to find as well, so that means a better job will have to be done in order to make it clearer to everyone from the get-go. I'll try to tackle it later if no one else does. 19:44, 26 January 2007 (UTC) Could it be placed in the "introduction" page that is added when users sign up? I also agree that the wording in some places need to changed to reflect a more professional and neutral stance. Get rid of the mind-reader bit for a start. Maybe "While the relationship between and nature of articles may make sense to you, ensure you demonstrate the relationship between and nature of articles clearly to ensure other readers can fully understand and appreciate the relevance of your article." About the notepad part, maybe: "Articles you submit must be relevant." or something similar. It's a good start nonetheless. My 2 cents' worth. --usscantabrian 20:32, 26 January 2007 (UTC)